A Preliminary Assessment of the New City of Toronto Enid Slack Enid Slack Consulting Inc. 214 King Street West, Suite 214 Toronto, ON M5H 3S6 On January 1, 1998, the new City of Toronto came into being by replacing the former metropolitan level of government and its constituent lower-tier munici- palities (Toronto, Etobicoke, North York, Scarborough, York and East York) with a single-tier city.1 This restructuring was not initiated by local initiative but by the provincial government through the passage of Bill 103, the City of To- ronto Act, 1996. 2 Indeed, opposition to the proposed amalgamation came from many different quarters: local municipalities (both inside and outside of Metro Toronto), the opposition parties, citizen organisations, and from within the Conservative party itself (see Stevenson and Gilbert 1999; Sancton 1998). The major citizen opposition was led by a former mayor of Toronto, John Sewell, who was behind the formation of the Citizens for Local Democracy in late 1996. Sewell’s opposition to amalgamation centred on the loss of local identity and 1. The new City of Tor onto is con tained within the G reate r To ron to Ar ea (G TA ) whic h is comprised of the City of Toronto plus the two-tier regions of Durham, Halton, Peel and York. The pop ulation of To ron to in 1999 was 2,385,421. The populations of the other regions of the GTA are: Durham -- 452,608; Halton -- 329,613; Peel -- 869,219; and York -- 618,497. These estimates, which were taken from the 1999 Ontario Municipal Directory, show that the population of Toronto represents about half of the population of the GTA. 2. Mu nicipa l restr uctur ing in Ontario is w idesprea d. In some cases, restructuring was initiated locally with provincial assistance such as in Kingston. At the request of some municipalities (for e xam ple, local m unicip alities in Kent County and Chatham, Temagami and others), the provincial government appointed a commissioner to make recommendations on restructuring. In four regions (Ottawa-Carleton, Ham ilton-Wentw orth, Sudbu ry and Haldim and-N orfolk), the Province appointed special advisors whose recommendations were subsequently adopted and turned into provincial legislation (the first three are one-tier megacities; Haldimand- No rfolk has been divided into two single-tier cities). Yet other municipalities have initiated and implemented restr uctur ing v olun tarily a t the loc al level. To d ate, all but f our coun ties in Ontario have undertaken some restructuring. © Canadian Journal of Regional Science/Revue canadienne des sciences régionales, XXIII:1 (Spring/printemps 2000), 13-29. ISSN: 0705-4580 Printed in Canada/Imprimé au Canada 14 SLACK reduced access to local government. In the broader context of the GTA, it was felt that amalgamation would result in increased polarisation within the region. On March 3, 1997, referenda on amalgamation were held in each of the lower-tier municipalities in Metro Toronto; about 36 % of eligible voters voted. Opposition to the proposed amalgamated City of Toronto (referred to as the “megacity”) ranged from 70 to 81 % of voters depending on the municipality. Furthermore, none of the studies of governance in the Greater Toronto Area (GTA) commissioned by the Province (discussed below) emphasized problems within Metropolitan Toronto or the need to create a megacity. Rather, these studies identified problems with the coordination of transportation, planning, water provision and waste management among the regions within the GTA and focussed on the need for a GTA governing body to address these service coordi- nation issues. This paper provides a preliminary assessment of the creation of the new City of Toronto, focussing on the financial aspects. It is preliminary because one year of post-amalgamation data is not sufficient to estimate the full impact of a restructuring. The paper briefly reviews the history leading up to the creation of the new City, summarises its finances and provides an initial analysis of the impact. In the paper, the reasons for restructuring are evaluated and it is con- cluded that it is unlikely that this type of restructuring will result in cost savings nor will it solve many of the non-financial problems currently faced by the new City of Toronto. Nevertheless, there may be some benefits from amalgamation. The Need for Regional Governance in the GTA Amalgamation had not been on the agenda prior to the introduction of Bill 103. The Office of the Greater Toronto Area (OGTA), which was established by the Province in 1988, focussed on a strategic vision for the GTA and the coordina- tion of regional issues (Stevenson and Gilbert 1999). A forum of GTA mayors (of local municipalities) and chairs (of regional governments) concentrated its efforts on economic development and marketing in the GTA. Further issues around regional coordination were raised by the GTA Task Force (chaired by Anne Golden). The Task Force was created by the Premier of Ontario on April 1, 1995, in response to growing concerns about the future of the economic performance of the urban region. The major conclusions of the GTA Task Force (1996) were that3: < the entire GTA needs to be treated as a single economic unit with a unified economic strategy; 3. There were also recommendations on property tax reform. A PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT OF THE NEW CITY OF TORONTO 15 < a new GTA governmental body is needed to deal with GTA-wide environ- mental and planning issues and to share major infrastructure and social costs; < more compact urban development that contains sprawl will make transit more viable and reduce infrastructure costs (the Task F orce estimated sav- ings at an average of $700 million to $1 billion per year for the next 25 years); < local government within the GTA needs to be simplified by eliminating Toronto’s upper tier (Metro) and the four surrounding regional govern- ments, and by reducing the number of local municipalities. The Who Does What (WDW) Panel, appointed by the provincial government in 1996 and chaired by David Crombie, also called on the Province to set up a GTA governance structure. It recommended: < the creation of a Greater Toronto Services Board (GTSB) eliminating the five metropolitan and regional governments; < consolidations of member municipalities into strong cities; < consolidations in Metro to create a strong urban core for the GTA; however, there was no consensus on whether there should be one city of Toronto or four cities. Notwithstanding ten years of provincially-commissioned reports on the need to coordinate service delivery between Toronto and the surrounding regions, the provincial government chose to amalgamate the municipalities within Toronto. The stated rationale was to save taxpayers’ money by replacing six lower-tier governments and the metropolitan level of government with one municipal government -- the new City of Toronto. Following the amalgamation of Toronto, the Province also established the Greater Toronto Services Board (GTSB).4 The GTSB was given no legislative authority except to oversee regional transit. It was not designed to be a level of government nor was it given direct taxing authority. The GTSB is comprised of 40 members plus the Chair. The members include the 25 mayors in the GTA, the four regional chairs, ten additional members from the City of Toronto council and one additional member who is sits on both the Mississauga and Peel coun- cils. For GT Transit matters, the City of Hamiltonm is represnted on the GTSB. Looking back over the reports on governance in the GTA, it is evident that the major concern was coordination of service delivery across the region. Neither the creation of the new City of Toronto nor the GTSB has adequately addressed these fundamental regional problems. 4. The Greater Toronto Services Board Act, 1998 sets out the structure and responsibilities of the Greater Toronto Services Board (GTSB) and the Greater Toronto Transit Authority. 16 SLACK Characteristics of the New City of Toronto The new City of Toronto has 2.4 million people and is 632 square kilometres. The operating budget of the new City of Toronto is about $6 billion, larger than six Canadian provinces. There are 26, 000 people working for the City and an additional 18,000 working for the 214 agencies, boards and commissions. The number of departments in the new City was reduced from 52 (in the seven former municipalities) to six. The number of divisions was reduced from 206 to 37. The number of executive positions was reduced from 381 to 154. The number of management positions was reduced from 1,837 to 1,204 (City of Toronto 1999). The new council was originally comprised of 57 councillor s (two elected from each ward) plus the mayor. Although this is a much larger council than in other Ontario municipalities (Stevenson and Gilbert 1999), each councillor also represents a much larger number of people than in other municipalities in the GTA. The number of representatives in the GTA ranges from 38 in Peel Region to 75 in York Region. In terms of representation by population, the range is from one councillor for every 7,300 people in Durham to one councillor for every 41,850 persons in Toronto. For the 2000 municipal election, the number of councillors in Toronto was reduced (unilaterally by provincial legislation) to 44. This resulted in one councillor for every 54,214 persons in Toronto. Much of the work of council is handled by six standing committees and other sub-committees and task forces. The City is also required to have commu- nity councils with members of council representing a particular area of the city. Community councils deal with neighbourhood issues such as development applications and local recreation needs.